Orrex (1000+ posts) Mon Sep-13-10 12:37 AM
Original message
I saw a young guy steal a book from an independent book seller. Isn't he awesome?
Advertisements [?]
Honestly, I can't think of a single reason why we shouldn't celebrate this lad's rebellious spirit. Who cares if it wasn't his book? He saw the chance to take something that didn't belong to him, and he acted upon it.

Good for him, I say!

And I hope that he has a throng of eager defenders when someone suggests that maybe, just maybe, he should have to face the legal implications of his theft.

Again, good for him!

ROFLCOPTER

He's mocking this thread, were DUmmies praise the theft of a Koran from someone who planned to burn it.

Translation: "Calling us hypocrites makes you a rethuglikkkan." :rolleyes:

Sonnabend

09-13-2010, 07:23 AM

I will reiterate by saying that a burning cross has been formally recognized as a specific mode of hate speech subsequent to due process.

The origin of the burning cross is dated to a nation, Scotland, BEFORE the US, you jackass, back to in fact the 1600's.

A burning cross was a summons to battle, for the clans to defend the land to the last man, so, no, it isnt "hate speech" at all

Fool.

djones520

09-13-2010, 07:39 AM

The origin of the burning cross is dated to a nation, Scotland, BEFORE the US, you jackass, back to in fact the 1600's.

A burning cross was a summons to battle, for the clans to defend the land to the last man, so, no, it isnt "hate speech" at all

Fool.

When I lived in Louisiana back in the early 90's, my neighbors had a burning cross put onto their lawn.

It wasn't a summons to battle.

He was referring to what it meant today, not 400 years ago.

Sonnabend

09-13-2010, 08:54 AM

When I lived in Louisiana back in the early 90's, my neighbors had a burning cross put onto their lawn.

It wasn't a summons to battle.

My POINT DJones, is that the burning cross was hijacked by the Klan, and it is NOT and never has been "hate speech"

Strange as it may seem, there is history and other nations OUTSIDE the US. The Scots history predates the US by oh, I dont know...several hundred years? :rolleyes:

djones520

09-13-2010, 09:06 AM

My POINT DJones, is that the burning cross was hijacked by the Klan, and it is NOT and never has been "hate speech"

Strange as it may seem, there is history and other nations OUTSIDE the US. The Scots history predates the US by oh, I dont know...several hundred years? :rolleyes:

Ok, but Orrex was referring to it now, not 400 years ago. Where is the disconnect here? He never mentioned a word about where it originated, just how it is viewed now, and he's mostly correct about it. It is a prosecutable offense if used as a means to intimidate, which in the usual use of the Klan, it is.

asdf2231

09-13-2010, 11:25 AM

My POINT DJones, is that the burning cross was hijacked by the Klan, and it is NOT and never has been "hate speech"

Strange as it may seem, there is history and other nations OUTSIDE the US. The Scots history predates the US by oh, I dont know...several hundred years? :rolleyes:

Your point is sorta silly there.

It's origins may have been hundreds of years ago in Scotland. Whatever.

Strange as it may seem? Nobody in America gives a crap what the Scotts did or did not do with a burning cross because in the context of OUR history as a nation it IS and HAS been a form of hate speech.

The intended use of something does NOT indicate it's contexted use or meaning. By your reckoning I could beat someone to death with a shovel and claim I didn't use a weapon because back in the whatever centurey BC it was CLEARLY invented as a farming aid.

FlaGator

09-13-2010, 11:43 AM

My POINT DJones, is that the burning cross was hijacked by the Klan, and it is NOT and never has been "hate speech"

Strange as it may seem, there is history and other nations OUTSIDE the US. The Scots history predates the US by oh, I dont know...several hundred years? :rolleyes:

The mean of something symbolic isn't defined by the original intent. It is defined by it's current usage otherwise the swastika would still be a symbol of good luck and the world gay would still mean happy.

Apache

09-13-2010, 04:05 PM

Amazing 140 posts and the thread is still going....:eek:

noonwitch

09-13-2010, 04:57 PM

The origin of the burning cross is dated to a nation, Scotland, BEFORE the US, you jackass, back to in fact the 1600's.

A burning cross was a summons to battle, for the clans to defend the land to the last man, so, no, it isnt "hate speech" at all

Fool.

It's not "hate speech" in Scotland. Whatever one thinks of the constitutionality of hate crime laws, nobody here thinks that a burning cross stands for anything but white supremacy-even in the inflammatory Madonna video for "Like a Prayer", the burning crosses were about the video's "story", which was of a black man getting blamed for a crime a white man committed.

NJCardFan

09-13-2010, 08:46 PM

Of course completely missed on the debate over the burning cross, that the klan and this symbol was an intimidation tactic used to entice blacks to vote Democrat. A little history goes a long way.

Besides, obsessing on theft of "property" is a right-wing thing.

I really wish I knew where these people lived. This way, I can go to their house, walk right in, go to the refrigerator or cupboard and help myself to whatever I want and when they, rightfully, would react negatively I'd hit them with this: "What's the problem? I thought "obsessing on theft of property was a right wing thing?""